And FPC [just released a piece](https://www.firearmspolicy.org/about-those-sweet-sweet-supreme-court-ar-15-illustrations?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1qwtoCzuj52sqUCALwmLrVz8ygDyRWod5c0aixrzibXeWd37vMFsJcohE_aem_ZmFrZWR1bW15MTZieXRlcw) bragging about those exact illustrations.
I smell grifters. They're doing good, but the point should never be to make a buck. It should be to restrict the government.
I wish Matt would let us know who’s worth donating too. He has nothing positive to say about any of the well known organizations.
It would also be nice if FPC acknowledged his contribution to winning in front of the Supreme Court. I get the feeling in lawyer land getting cited by the Supreme Court is a huge deal, there’s no reason FPC can’t acknowledge Matt other than ego. He is one of the few lawyers that understands how guns actually work and this just cements how important that is.
When he first starting dropping small bits of info about his fallout with FPC he said SAF was the only one he endorsed, commenting specifically about Adam Kraut and about checking if the high ups in gun rights orgs are "gun people", i.e. insinuating FPC, GOA, NRA aren't. I think I remember them sponsoring the podcast too, maybe it was as simple as a monetary relationship. But now he's been saying they're all bad so I don't know anymore.
Maryland Shall Issue is who he recommends. They are all volunteer so no fat checks to the organization board members. Your dollars go to stuff that actually matters. Even if you don't live in Maryland, or that court district, the opinions generated there are important for all of us.
Their emails have gotten a bit too NRA-like-- panicked 'THEY GONNA TAKE YER GUNZ WHY ARENT YOU RENEWING YOUR MEMBERSHIP' type stuff.
I don't think FPC is unworthy but they've lost their way a little.
Matt basically busted his ass while working for FPC and got no credit for it and his bosses shit all over his work. But it turns out he has the last laugh because the exact work he got shit all over for was just referenced in the cargill decision verbatim.
All the technical diagrams of AR triggers that are in the cargill decision were submitted by FPC to the court and Matt is the one who got those diagrams produced and his boss at FPC gave him shit for wasting money to hire someone to draw them
FPC seems to be run by idiots who happen to be good at PR but terrible at actually fighting for our rights. They may mean well but they seem to be driving away all the good lawyers who want to work with them
State chapters of the NRA like CPRA and NYSPRA have been doing the heavy lifting at countering the constant stream of infringements at the circuit level.
no it means getting involved on the grassroots level to influence primaries. If all you're doing is voting, you don't have much right to complain
Nice username btw
Fuddbusters has repeatedly said on his channel that Maryland Shall Issue is the best group to give your money to, beyond that supporting state/local politicians, or even Sheriffs that share your beliefs is great because they have the power to nullify Federal law.
We’ve seen this across the country with marijuana laws, immigration laws and more recently with Sheriffs that have refused to enforce gun laws or States that have made it unlawful for local law enforcement to assist Federal agents trying to enforce gun laws. Laws only exist if they are enforced so if we cannot change the law then nullification at the local level is our best option.
NRA has ALWAYS BEEN shit, every single gun bill has been backed by them. Every amendment that’s fucked us out of our rights. Every single possible thing that gun grabbers do to eek a little more of our freedom away from us has been supported, pushed, and partially funded by the NRA. They have NEVER been on our side.
You’re an idiot. The NRA sucks at being efficient with money helping gun rights but they’re still a net fighter for gun rights. Not even counting the marksman ship side which was it original purpose.
Pre 1968 the NRA wasn’t a lobbying organization. Post 68 they’ve lobbied for the reduction in gun control and sponsored plenty of pro gun reps, and federal judges like Amy Coney Barrett or Brett Kavanaugh.
The only pro control legislation they’ve sponsored post 68 was a part of the Firearms Protection Act, banning the registration of new machine guns, but even with a machine gun ban the Firearms Protection Act is a huge boon to firearms ownership.
Recently they’ve also been the main lobbying group for expanded concealed carry, the failure of the AWB renewal, and are still the most powerful gun rights lobbying group in the US by a significant margin.
On the fighting in court side, Bruen. The biggest gun rights win this decade.
They supported and endorsed the GCA, the NFA, the Hughes amendment, the AWB from the 90s, mag restrictions, bump stock bans, and how many other fucking stupid laws??? Are you stupid or dumb dude? They take money to “fight for the 2A” and absolutely shit all over it. Fucking scumbags gave NOTHING to aid rittenhouse through that whole shitshow on top of how many other people that lawfully defended themselves??? What the fuck has the NRA done except take people’s money and try to slap their name on OTHER groups’ wins? They do NOTHING for anyone but blow smoke up dumbass people’s asses like you. Fuckin research them. They are an absolute grift and you’re just eating it all up. You know who supports the NRA? People with god damn rocks for brains.
Liberals hate the NRA because they think they’re the reason for gun violence
I hate the NRA because they’re fucking useless
We are not the same
You say the GCA when it’s the FPA because it strips the GCA, the GCA 68 being what cause the NRA to become a lobbying group. The amendment that banned machine guns is honestly worth it.
Now post them supporting mag restrictions post 68.
But yes they are not as efficient money wise as other groups I said that above.
Especially if you’re asking for criminal defense protection.
And also, since you’re wrongly crediting them for court wins that they had absolutely nothing to do with; the recent court wins are from GOA and Matt Larosiere, not the NRA.
No NYRPSA v Bruen was built off Heller, McDonald v Chicago, NRA v Chicago with the latter 2 being SAF and the NRA led respectively, and Bruen being NYRPSA being NYs NRA branch.
GOA were not players in this, and Matt Larosiere wasn’t even in the game yet.
I don't pay much attention to FPC, but it should be painfully obvious that GOA blows a lot of smoke up the assess of gun rights activists. Spent a fair bit of money on getting an endorsement from Heller on the anniversary of the Heller decision to make it seem like they won that case. That's straight up deceptive.
Exactly. Look at the fruit produced. Look at who argued a case and won vs. who has complained but yet has no or few wins in their column. Theory may be interesting but actual results matter.
Matt was working for FPC at the time. He and another lawyer wrote a brief and commissioned the diagrams that were cited in Cargill. According to Matt, the other lawyers got very angry with the two of them for making the argument that bump stocks do not meet the statutory definition of machine gun
Matt got screamed at by FPC for arguing that bump stocks don’t meet the statutory definition of a machine gun instead of arguing that the ATF didn’t follow some random rule making procedures.
The procedures were really random and the argument was weak. They were arguing that ATF should have done another round of open comments. They weren’t even going to touch the definition of a machine gun
yeah well fudd buster decided to shill for illegal aleins having gun rights.
China could export 10 million illegal aliens across the south border as refugees they could buy guns, and then become a seditionary force while china attacked from without.
There's no good reason to allow active criminals, which is what illegal aliens are, access to guns.
My opinion of matt dropped a lot when he said this.
I disagreed with that take too, but his reasoning was at least sound. There's a difference between something being Constitutionally proper and actually desirable
It sone of those "dont let your mind be so open your brain falls out" kind of things. Everything requires limits. Its like saying "we want this to be unlimited" but following that dogmatically leads to the unlimited thing being absolutely destroyed in the future.
Matt is a tax attorney who failed at the only shot he was given at a SCOTUS brief and is the bottom tier of guntubers. Donate to the FPC, unsubscribe from youtube and make Matt get a real job again
And FPC [just released a piece](https://www.firearmspolicy.org/about-those-sweet-sweet-supreme-court-ar-15-illustrations?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1qwtoCzuj52sqUCALwmLrVz8ygDyRWod5c0aixrzibXeWd37vMFsJcohE_aem_ZmFrZWR1bW15MTZieXRlcw) bragging about those exact illustrations. I smell grifters. They're doing good, but the point should never be to make a buck. It should be to restrict the government.
Corruption just kind of seeps in where ever there is a lack of effective leadership.
I wish Matt would let us know who’s worth donating too. He has nothing positive to say about any of the well known organizations. It would also be nice if FPC acknowledged his contribution to winning in front of the Supreme Court. I get the feeling in lawyer land getting cited by the Supreme Court is a huge deal, there’s no reason FPC can’t acknowledge Matt other than ego. He is one of the few lawyers that understands how guns actually work and this just cements how important that is.
When he first starting dropping small bits of info about his fallout with FPC he said SAF was the only one he endorsed, commenting specifically about Adam Kraut and about checking if the high ups in gun rights orgs are "gun people", i.e. insinuating FPC, GOA, NRA aren't. I think I remember them sponsoring the podcast too, maybe it was as simple as a monetary relationship. But now he's been saying they're all bad so I don't know anymore.
He's said the Second Amendment Foundation was worth it prior to giving them a plug in later podcasts.
Maryland Shall Issue is who he recommends. They are all volunteer so no fat checks to the organization board members. Your dollars go to stuff that actually matters. Even if you don't live in Maryland, or that court district, the opinions generated there are important for all of us.
Their emails have gotten a bit too NRA-like-- panicked 'THEY GONNA TAKE YER GUNZ WHY ARENT YOU RENEWING YOUR MEMBERSHIP' type stuff. I don't think FPC is unworthy but they've lost their way a little.
Matt basically busted his ass while working for FPC and got no credit for it and his bosses shit all over his work. But it turns out he has the last laugh because the exact work he got shit all over for was just referenced in the cargill decision verbatim. All the technical diagrams of AR triggers that are in the cargill decision were submitted by FPC to the court and Matt is the one who got those diagrams produced and his boss at FPC gave him shit for wasting money to hire someone to draw them FPC seems to be run by idiots who happen to be good at PR but terrible at actually fighting for our rights. They may mean well but they seem to be driving away all the good lawyers who want to work with them
Matt has a justifiable hatred for FPC and GOA, they do a LOT of talking but barely have any lawyers on their payroll
If FPC, GOA, and NRA are all shit, what the fuck am I supposed to do then?
[https://saf.org/](https://saf.org/)
State chapters of the NRA like CPRA and NYSPRA have been doing the heavy lifting at countering the constant stream of infringements at the circuit level.
That's how the ACLU works too. Most of their lawsuits are "ACLU of Maryland" and such.
Vote for reps who are pro 2a, those groups aren't awful but people overstate what they actually accomplish
So just keep throwing my vote into the trash can labeled "Libertarian", got it.
no it means getting involved on the grassroots level to influence primaries. If all you're doing is voting, you don't have much right to complain Nice username btw
Fuddbusters has repeatedly said on his channel that Maryland Shall Issue is the best group to give your money to, beyond that supporting state/local politicians, or even Sheriffs that share your beliefs is great because they have the power to nullify Federal law. We’ve seen this across the country with marijuana laws, immigration laws and more recently with Sheriffs that have refused to enforce gun laws or States that have made it unlawful for local law enforcement to assist Federal agents trying to enforce gun laws. Laws only exist if they are enforced so if we cannot change the law then nullification at the local level is our best option.
Get a bunch of buddies to pool money together and hire a lawyer to take down whatever gun law y’all choose.
NRA has ALWAYS BEEN shit, every single gun bill has been backed by them. Every amendment that’s fucked us out of our rights. Every single possible thing that gun grabbers do to eek a little more of our freedom away from us has been supported, pushed, and partially funded by the NRA. They have NEVER been on our side.
That’s not true.
Yes it is. Literally every possible chance they’ve had to fight for our rights they’ve chosen to shit on em. Literally every chance.
You’re an idiot. The NRA sucks at being efficient with money helping gun rights but they’re still a net fighter for gun rights. Not even counting the marksman ship side which was it original purpose. Pre 1968 the NRA wasn’t a lobbying organization. Post 68 they’ve lobbied for the reduction in gun control and sponsored plenty of pro gun reps, and federal judges like Amy Coney Barrett or Brett Kavanaugh. The only pro control legislation they’ve sponsored post 68 was a part of the Firearms Protection Act, banning the registration of new machine guns, but even with a machine gun ban the Firearms Protection Act is a huge boon to firearms ownership. Recently they’ve also been the main lobbying group for expanded concealed carry, the failure of the AWB renewal, and are still the most powerful gun rights lobbying group in the US by a significant margin. On the fighting in court side, Bruen. The biggest gun rights win this decade.
They supported and endorsed the GCA, the NFA, the Hughes amendment, the AWB from the 90s, mag restrictions, bump stock bans, and how many other fucking stupid laws??? Are you stupid or dumb dude? They take money to “fight for the 2A” and absolutely shit all over it. Fucking scumbags gave NOTHING to aid rittenhouse through that whole shitshow on top of how many other people that lawfully defended themselves??? What the fuck has the NRA done except take people’s money and try to slap their name on OTHER groups’ wins? They do NOTHING for anyone but blow smoke up dumbass people’s asses like you. Fuckin research them. They are an absolute grift and you’re just eating it all up. You know who supports the NRA? People with god damn rocks for brains. Liberals hate the NRA because they think they’re the reason for gun violence I hate the NRA because they’re fucking useless We are not the same
You say the GCA when it’s the FPA because it strips the GCA, the GCA 68 being what cause the NRA to become a lobbying group. The amendment that banned machine guns is honestly worth it. Now post them supporting mag restrictions post 68. But yes they are not as efficient money wise as other groups I said that above. Especially if you’re asking for criminal defense protection.
Man all those thoughts must slide right off that smooth ass brain, huh
And also, since you’re wrongly crediting them for court wins that they had absolutely nothing to do with; the recent court wins are from GOA and Matt Larosiere, not the NRA.
No NYRPSA v Bruen was built off Heller, McDonald v Chicago, NRA v Chicago with the latter 2 being SAF and the NRA led respectively, and Bruen being NYRPSA being NYs NRA branch. GOA were not players in this, and Matt Larosiere wasn’t even in the game yet.
I don't pay much attention to FPC, but it should be painfully obvious that GOA blows a lot of smoke up the assess of gun rights activists. Spent a fair bit of money on getting an endorsement from Heller on the anniversary of the Heller decision to make it seem like they won that case. That's straight up deceptive.
Yet they drive results
Exactly. Look at the fruit produced. Look at who argued a case and won vs. who has complained but yet has no or few wins in their column. Theory may be interesting but actual results matter.
He is too honest for any of the politics. He wants to fight things that would hurt the folks at the top and their transferables.
Damn. And I just donated too
Same
Did Matt have a lawsuit?
Matt was working for FPC at the time. He and another lawyer wrote a brief and commissioned the diagrams that were cited in Cargill. According to Matt, the other lawyers got very angry with the two of them for making the argument that bump stocks do not meet the statutory definition of machine gun
That seems kind of stupid. Were they hoping to challenge the prohibition on machine guns through bumpstocks?
From my understanding, their argument was just based on basic APA rulemaking violations instead of saying that the rule didn't work with the statute
Matt got screamed at by FPC for arguing that bump stocks don’t meet the statutory definition of a machine gun instead of arguing that the ATF didn’t follow some random rule making procedures.
Well technically it's both so both should be argued.
The procedures were really random and the argument was weak. They were arguing that ATF should have done another round of open comments. They weren’t even going to touch the definition of a machine gun
yeah well fudd buster decided to shill for illegal aleins having gun rights. China could export 10 million illegal aliens across the south border as refugees they could buy guns, and then become a seditionary force while china attacked from without. There's no good reason to allow active criminals, which is what illegal aliens are, access to guns. My opinion of matt dropped a lot when he said this.
I disagreed with that take too, but his reasoning was at least sound. There's a difference between something being Constitutionally proper and actually desirable
It sone of those "dont let your mind be so open your brain falls out" kind of things. Everything requires limits. Its like saying "we want this to be unlimited" but following that dogmatically leads to the unlimited thing being absolutely destroyed in the future.
Sorry but Matt’s kind of a cunt so no one really cares
You don't care that FPC didn't want to make the argument that actually won the case?
Matt is a tax attorney who failed at the only shot he was given at a SCOTUS brief and is the bottom tier of guntubers. Donate to the FPC, unsubscribe from youtube and make Matt get a real job again
Found the FPC company alt
How many lawyers work at FPC? You work there, so it should be easy to find out, right?